The Theatrics of Spatial History

Jennifer Spatz

2/9/2021

Response Paper 4

The Theatrics of Spatial History

In the passage, Spatial History, by Paul Carter, the idea of land before known history is explored and compared to theater performances. Before land was developed into what we know and see today, Carter challenges the idea that this land was not designed by those seeking out historical significance, but instead, the land followed a natural progression, one that was inevitable with the events of humans and their developments. Carter claims that within the development and knowledge of history, historians are not the ones who stage or dictate the events of history, but they are instead the ones who weave together the pieces of history, forming the plot and background. Historians, in this sense, are merely audience members or dictators viewing a performance and describing the events. “History is the playwright” itself, and there are no other writers, just historians who play a spectator role. 

“For the result of cause and effect narrative history is to give the impression that events unfold according to a logic of their own. They refer neither to place, nor to the people.” I find the comparison between history and the theater as Carter explains, to be very interesting. It is a comparison that I have never considered before but now that I have heard it, I think that it adds an interesting element to history. I think that it is a fair comparison in which there is an array of inevitable drama that unfolds, sustainable illusions, and unquestioned convention of the spectator. As history has a timeline with events unfolding through a record, creating events that are open for interpretation while the result of the story stands.